社区在气候、和平与安全问题上的声音:环境建设和平方案的社会学习方法

Leonardo Medina, Marisa O. Ensor, Frans Schapendonk, Stefan Sieber, Grazia Pacillo, Peter Laderach, Jon Hellin, Michelle Bonatti
{"title":"社区在气候、和平与安全问题上的声音:环境建设和平方案的社会学习方法","authors":"Leonardo Medina, Marisa O. Ensor, Frans Schapendonk, Stefan Sieber, Grazia Pacillo, Peter Laderach, Jon Hellin, Michelle Bonatti","doi":"10.1177/27538796231207030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Approaches to operationalising the linkages between climate, peace and security are increasingly demanded by international organisations. Yet, there is a limited understanding of what effective programming practices that address climate-related security risks entail. Critical voices argue that programme designs often rely on analyses that ignore structural and cultural realities on the ground, leading to technocratic understandings of risks, and prescriptions for action that do not relate to people’s experiences, perceptions and values. Advised by social learning theory, this study developed and evaluated a participatory appraisal method to guide the design of environmental peacebuilding programming strategies meant to address climate-related security risks. The method was evaluated across nine rural locations in Kenya, Senegal and Guatemala, involving 221 participants. Based on a critical evaluation of the method, opportunities and challenges for the use of social learning approaches to advise environmental peacebuilding programming are discussed. Results indicate that appraisal processes of collective reflection can support jointly articulated and context-relevant understandings of climate-related security risks. This shared knowledge can then support local communities in the design of climate adaptation strategies that potentially contribute to sustainable peacebuilding. Settings characterised by low political legitimacy and the unwillingness of conflictive actors to engage in dialogue are identified as barriers for the development of feasible programming strategies.","PeriodicalId":11727,"journal":{"name":"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security","volume":"116 29","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Community voices on climate, peace and security: A social learning approach to programming environmental peacebuilding\",\"authors\":\"Leonardo Medina, Marisa O. Ensor, Frans Schapendonk, Stefan Sieber, Grazia Pacillo, Peter Laderach, Jon Hellin, Michelle Bonatti\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/27538796231207030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Approaches to operationalising the linkages between climate, peace and security are increasingly demanded by international organisations. Yet, there is a limited understanding of what effective programming practices that address climate-related security risks entail. Critical voices argue that programme designs often rely on analyses that ignore structural and cultural realities on the ground, leading to technocratic understandings of risks, and prescriptions for action that do not relate to people’s experiences, perceptions and values. Advised by social learning theory, this study developed and evaluated a participatory appraisal method to guide the design of environmental peacebuilding programming strategies meant to address climate-related security risks. The method was evaluated across nine rural locations in Kenya, Senegal and Guatemala, involving 221 participants. Based on a critical evaluation of the method, opportunities and challenges for the use of social learning approaches to advise environmental peacebuilding programming are discussed. Results indicate that appraisal processes of collective reflection can support jointly articulated and context-relevant understandings of climate-related security risks. This shared knowledge can then support local communities in the design of climate adaptation strategies that potentially contribute to sustainable peacebuilding. Settings characterised by low political legitimacy and the unwillingness of conflictive actors to engage in dialogue are identified as barriers for the development of feasible programming strategies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11727,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security\",\"volume\":\"116 29\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/27538796231207030\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27538796231207030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

国际组织越来越多地要求将气候、和平与安全之间的联系付诸实施。然而,对于解决与气候相关的安全风险所需要的有效编程实践的理解是有限的。批评的声音认为,方案设计往往依赖于忽视实地结构和文化现实的分析,导致对风险的技术官僚式理解,以及与人们的经验、观念和价值观无关的行动处方。在社会学习理论的指导下,本研究开发并评估了一种参与式评估方法,以指导旨在应对气候相关安全风险的环境建设和平规划战略的设计。该方法在肯尼亚、塞内加尔和危地马拉的9个农村地区进行了评估,涉及221名参与者。在对该方法进行批判性评价的基础上,讨论了利用社会学习方法为环境建设和平方案提供建议的机遇和挑战。结果表明,集体反思的评估过程可以支持对气候相关安全风险的明确的、与环境相关的理解。然后,这些共享的知识可以支持当地社区设计气候适应战略,从而可能有助于可持续的建设和平。以政治合法性低和冲突行为者不愿进行对话为特征的环境被认为是制定可行方案拟订战略的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Community voices on climate, peace and security: A social learning approach to programming environmental peacebuilding
Approaches to operationalising the linkages between climate, peace and security are increasingly demanded by international organisations. Yet, there is a limited understanding of what effective programming practices that address climate-related security risks entail. Critical voices argue that programme designs often rely on analyses that ignore structural and cultural realities on the ground, leading to technocratic understandings of risks, and prescriptions for action that do not relate to people’s experiences, perceptions and values. Advised by social learning theory, this study developed and evaluated a participatory appraisal method to guide the design of environmental peacebuilding programming strategies meant to address climate-related security risks. The method was evaluated across nine rural locations in Kenya, Senegal and Guatemala, involving 221 participants. Based on a critical evaluation of the method, opportunities and challenges for the use of social learning approaches to advise environmental peacebuilding programming are discussed. Results indicate that appraisal processes of collective reflection can support jointly articulated and context-relevant understandings of climate-related security risks. This shared knowledge can then support local communities in the design of climate adaptation strategies that potentially contribute to sustainable peacebuilding. Settings characterised by low political legitimacy and the unwillingness of conflictive actors to engage in dialogue are identified as barriers for the development of feasible programming strategies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Community voices on climate, peace and security: A social learning approach to programming environmental peacebuilding Interventions addressing conflict in communities hosting climate-influenced migrants: Literature review Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict—50 years of effort, and no end in sight Climate change and homeland security nexus: Proposal for a comprehensive conceptual framework Positive peace and environmental sustainability: Local evidence from Afghanistan and Nepal
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1